W15 After reading / Sangmin Choe

 1. 

The Manual of Style (MoS or MOS) is an in-depth guide that provides standards on how to format Wikipedia articles. The content is more important than formatting, so you don't need to memorize it, just refer to it whenever you need it. 

The article should begin with a short summary. Next, readers should be able to access more specific content. The lead section is the first part of the article.  The first sentence of the lead typically contains a concise definition and establishes the topic's notability. The Lead section should be easy and concise.  The first sentence of the lead typically contains a concise definition and establishes the topic's notability. 

Images make it easier for readers to understand. Images should be spread evenly through an article, be relevant to the sections in which the images are displayed, and include an explanatory caption.

Quotations from sources should not be abused. It should be a reliable source, and you can refer to the reference style. Sources should be cited when adding material that is controversial or likely to be challenged, when quoting someone, when adding material to the biography of a living person, and when uploading an image.

Linking is an important feature in Wikipedia. It enables immediate movement both inside and outside Wikipedia and helps readers understand. But It should be careful not to lose readability.

For consistency, only one language should be used in one article.

Avoid phrases that will go out of date with time (e.g. recently). And editors should care about the grammatical point.


2. 

I think I followed the above precautions when I wrote the article. Last time I made the wrong link, the bot automatically corrected it. It was great that Wikipedia automatically discovered what I hadn't discovered. I think the efforts of editors, Wikipedia's algorithms, are harmonizing to create a better service.

3.
Which part of Wikipedia do you make the most mistakes when editing?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

 1. Summary  The Internet has changed our culture so much. First, through the Internet, we can meet people regardless of distance. People in each country communicated over the Internet and reduced the barriers to distance by creating relationships. Also, the Internet has let us stay away from books. When we want to find expertise, we can get it from Wikipedia or Google. Even information in books can be obtained through e-books, reducing access to libraries and paper books. 2. Interesting point Further to the above, our brains are gradually degenerating because we don't have to remember information. We are constantly interrupted by SNS notifications ringing on our phones when we do something, so our concentration and attention are being reduced. Furthermore, the ease of obtaining information online is causing our short-term memory to decline. 3. Discussion point I think the Internet has made it easy to sever a relationship with a person because we can meet another person simply...
Read more

W7: Review of Good Faith Collaboration / Suyoung Han

  Review of Good Faith Collaboration 1) Summary – Wikipedia from an ethnographic perspective: focusing on collaboration within the community Wikipedia, which is called the world's largest encyclopedia, is an open community and is becoming more and more solid with the participation of various people, conflict, and resolution. In this respect, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. attempted to explain the culture that takes place within Wikipedia. The book describes how Wikipedia was created and what it values. In particular, he described Wikipedia in a book from an ethnographic point of view, and focused on cooperation within the community. 2) Interesting Point – Wikipedia is simple, but not I realized that Wikipedia is not just a site made up of community activities, but rather a collaborative activity that is carried out concretely for the goal. Before I read the book, Wikipedia was an encyclopedia site that only gave me information (even I didn't trust the information), and I thought ...
Read more

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei

 Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? In terms of the comprehensiveness of the content, we have to admit the advantages of Wikipedia. For example, Wikipedia is undoubtedly my first choice when I don't understand an event at all. It is convenient, fast and comprehensive, and I can spend the least time to understand the whole content of this fact as comprehensively and neutrally as possible. But in the process of in-depth learning, Wikipedia can only be used as an introductory content, because in learning we need to understand this fact as much as possible, and we need to understand the different views of scholars in different regions on the same event. There will be different theories. Some theories seem to be not neutral or even discriminatory or ethnographic at present (such as Marxism and Marxism in China), and it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Be shown. In short, Wikipedia has a very low threshold for users. It assu...
Read more